Anne McIntosh: The whole House has benefited from my hon. Friend's astute clarification which, I hope, will lead to even greater support for the Bill. I asked the Home Office for the level of burglary detection in each of the past eight years. Incredibly, it has fallen dramatically. When the Conservatives left government in 1997, 23 per cent. of burglaries were detected by the police in England and Wales. As of 2001–02, that rate had reduced to 12 per cent., and the detection rates for offences of burglary recorded by the police in England and Wales was only 13 per cent. in 2004. Right hon. and hon. Members will know that many people who report burglaries, particularly of vehicles, are simply given a police number. Those burglaries are not investigated or detected, so the offenders are never brought to book. Even more worryingly, only 3.6 per cent. of defendants were convicted in burglary in the courts in 2004–05. In the same year, only 1.6 per cent. of defendants were sentenced to immediate custody or given a custodial sentence for burglary.
	What message are we as legislators giving victims and, indeed, potential burglars other than suggesting that burglary is completely risk-free? To receive a criminal sentence and be designated a criminal someone must be accused, and their crime must be detected, recorded and prosecuted. The figures show that that is simply not happening. In clause 2, I seek to extend the provisions of the Bill to Northern Ireland, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Newark, because when his Bill was in Committee he said that such measures should be relevant to Northern Ireland as well as to England and Wales. I would like the provisions of my Bill to extend to Scotland, as I am qualified as a Scottish advocate, albeit a non-practising one. I hope to pursue that proposal if I am fortunate enough to see my Bill proceed to Committee. Under proposed new subsection (1A), a property owner is not guilty of an offence unless they use "grossly disproportionate" force and unless the excessive nature of that force is apparent to them.

Anne McIntosh: My hon. Friend has been listening closely, as the Criminal Justice Act 2003 sets out the test for an offence to be grossly disproportionate. The Government had to revisit the issue in the light of the claim by Brendan Fearon against Tony Martin in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Norfolk. Brendan Fearon was granted legal aid, reportedly to claim compensation of £15,000 for the injuries that he received. I delighted that in September 2003 the case was settled out of court when Brendan Fearon dropped his claim and Tony Martin therefore dropped his counter-claim. Such cases make a mockery of the law. I am arguing, with the support of my hon. Friends, that we need a consistent test. Burglars should not be able to sue us for damages that we may inflict on them when they intrude and trespass on our property and commit a criminal act so, under the Bill, there is a higher test of grossly proportionate force for the householder.

Nick Palmer: Initially, I shall ask some of the questions that the hon. Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh) did not allow me to put during her own presentation. The first is that the crucial distinction made by her Bill by comparison with the current state of affairs is to replace the test of reasonableness with the test of gross disproportionality. She was asked by the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Bone), who left the Chamber immediately afterwards, what would happen if his wife set the dog on an intruder. The hon. Lady responded—with respect to her—evasively, saying that that was a matter for the courts to decide. Is that not a classic example of the state of uncertainty, about which she and her hon. Friends complain, in the current situation?
	At present, if the hon. Lady were to break into my house and I had to decide how far I could deter her, I would have to consider what would be deemed reasonable. Under her Bill, I would have to consider what was grossly disproportionate. It is possible to imagine situations where behaviour is unreasonable but not grossly disproportionate, or cases where it is grossly disproportionate but not unreasonable.
	Let us take, for example, the case of the British tourist who, in one of the southern states of America, one dark night got lost. He went up the path to a remote house and wanted to ask the way. As he approached, the nervous householder, who I believe had been burgled several times, thought he was another intruder and shot the tourist dead. We could all agree that that was grossly disproportionate—[Hon. Members: "Some of us would."] Unlike the hon. Lady, I shall be glad to give way if she wishes to intervene, but I hope she would agree that that was grossly disproportionate.
	Could we also say that that was unreasonable? Looking at the case, at least through British eyes, we would say, yes, it was unreasonable. But suppose the householder had not shot the tourist dead, but merely wounded him. An American court, and, I submit, a British court might in that case have said, "Well, this is grossly disproportionate—using a firearm to attack somebody who has not yet done anything worse than walk up the drive—but is it unreasonable?" One could argue that with a history of burglaries, it is understandable if the householder feels nervous.
	Here we have a case where the householder would be prosecuted under the hon. Lady's Bill, but not under the current law. Her Bill would replace one uncertainty with another uncertainty. That is being done not in order to resolve the uncertainty—if that was her intention she would merely adopt the formulation that the householder can do anything on his own premises—but to seek partisan advantage, by pretending to bring forward a different form of words which in practice would do nothing to reassure the householder that they would be able to operate. The householder would have exactly the same dilemma: to judge what a court might think of his or her behaviour—

Nick Palmer: Yes; that returns me to my dialogue with the hon. Member for North Thanet. The issue has been exploited for partisan purposes, and it has also been whipped up by elements in the press. If one reads the Daily Express every day, and one only reads the Daily Express, it is very difficult to retain the will to live. [Laughter.] Every day, the front page contains a new catastrophe, a new sell-out, a new betrayal and a new threat to the existence of the British human race. Among the terrible catastrophes that the Daily Express describes is an alleged failure of the law to give due account to the position of the householder.

Nick Palmer: Yes, I do agree. That is one of the fundamental difficulties about the Bill. Frankly, it is an example of gesture politics. If the Conservative party were in government, we would be sitting on the Opposition Benches saying that it is an example of the Government trying to be seen to do something. However, there is no evidence that it would make any concrete difference. I do not believe that a British jury would make this very fine distinction between unreasonable behaviour and grossly disproportionate behaviour. In a case such as that of Tony Martin, the jury would convict in either event. The hon. Member for Ribble Valley described his experience with a shoplifter. In a case such as that, the jury would acquit in either event. Indeed, I do not think that the Crown Prosecution Service would not attempt to prosecute in such cases. As I understand it, it was not only the hon. Gentleman's immunity that protected him from prosecution.

Sadiq Khan: I appreciate how my hon. Friend is allowing those of us who are concerned about the victims of crime to intervene on him.
	Does my hon. Friend not think that it bizarre and irrational that the Opposition appear willing to give the victims of crime in the home greater rights than the victims of crime in the streets? For example, is it not illogical and irrational that the victim of a rape in a park will be allowed to use only reasonable force to defend herself whereas the victim of a burglary in a house would be able to use grossly disproportionate force?

Ian Austin: Will my hon. Friend reflect on the appalling situation whereby homeowners in the US are being attacked and shot with their own weapons? In some instances, the burglar has broken in and the homeowner has produced their gun, only for the burglar to grab it and shoot the homeowner. I should also correct my hon. Friend's earlier point: I believe that Clint Eastwood actually said, "Go ahead, punk, make my day."

Andrew Dismore: My hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen makes the point clearly and my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting also makes the point that the burglar in question was not exactly an objective observer of the situation, as he was a victim, having been shot in the buttocks. His view of what may or may not be appropriate could be rather different from that of a burglar who has yet to experience a response from a householder.

Andrew Dismore: That has been remarked upon before.
	The hon. Member for North Thanet challenged me to say why I do not agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead and my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey) about the Bill. Perhaps I could ask him why he does not agree with the Leader of the Opposition, who made his position absolutely clear.

Peter Bone: I know how hard my hon. Friend works on behalf of his constituents. I feel a little guilty that secondary school children from Wellingborough are being bussed into Kettering because provision in Wellingborough is insufficient. I shall address his second point later in my speech.
	What was the solution proposed by the local authority and the Government? They decided to force already overcrowded schools to take even more pupils, which damaged the education not only of the pupils forced into those schools, but of all those already there. That should not have been allowed to happen, but unfortunately some children still do not have a school place. Since 2001, there has been a huge amount of growth in my constituency with many, many new families, whose children require secondary school places, moving into the area.
	Over the past four years, there has been an explosion of new development in my constituency, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr. Hollobone) has referred, and it is set to get much, much worse, with thousands of new homes being built on the order of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. The Milton Keynes south midlands sub-regional strategy will see 13,000 new homes being built in Wellingborough by 2021, with another 10,000 homes planned for east Northamptonshire, large parts of which are in my constituency. Yet despite the knowledge that those new homes will be built, the Government have not indicated whether the infrastructure will be in place to support new and existing Wellingborough residents and their children.
	Turning to the problems that we face at the moment, there are currently four secondary schools in Wellingborough—three are foundation schools and one is a community school. I have been told that in Wellingborough between nine and 10 children a month find themselves without a secondary school place and must go through a lengthy process in order to get into a school. For example, a parent came to see me at my surgery last Friday. Mr. Hussein moved back into Wellingborough after being away for two years. He has two children, one of whom is 17 and one of whom is 12. The 17-year-old had previously been educated at a secondary school in Wellingborough, but that school could not re-admit her because it is now over-subscribed. The other child could not get into a secondary school near where they live, and both children were told that they had to go on a waiting list, so they are currently at home with no education at all.
	I have spoken to the local education authority, which will do its best to get those children into a school. However, the process that it uses to place nine or 10 children a month involves a meeting which occurs only once a month and which can only occur after the LEA has been made aware of the situation. It is quite possible that such children will be without any education for three months. Do the Government think that that would be the case if one of Wellingborough's secondary schools had not been knocked down?
	The LEA claims that some secondary school places are available in Wellingborough, but those places are all at the only school in Wellingborough that is in special measures. For many families moving into Wellingborough, there is no choice whatever—no matter where they live and no matter how far away they are from the school, they must go to the school that is in special measures. That situation is unacceptable, because there must be choice—parents should have some choice in what school their children go to. I note with interest that the Government's education White Paper advocates parental choice, which is welcome, but unfortunately it is just not happening in my constituency.
	Even those pupils coming from primary schools in Wellingborough are limited for choice. At the Wrenn school last year, there were 280 applicants for 250 year 7 places. Twenty-six people appealed, but only three of those appellants were able to get a place at the school. That means that the school is already, in year 7, three pupils over the number that it considers to be its maximum admission level. The admissions system allows parents to put down a first, second and third choice of schools in Wellingborough, but if their children do not get their first-choice place, they are extremely unlikely to get their second choice, because those will already have been filled.
	It is natural that every parent wants their child to go to the best possible school, and inevitable that some schools are better than others, but the most popular schools in my constituency are constantly oversubscribed and struggle with the limited capacity of their school buildings. Let me take one as an example. It is extremely popular and high-achieving. Only 208 places in each year group are available because of the restrictions of building capacity. In fact, the school now has to operate a one-way system on the stairs because the corridors are so full. It is having to use up its reserves to pay for essential maintenance. There is damp on the walls in some of the classrooms and condensation on the windows. This popular and high-achieving school needs Government funding to allow it to remain so. It is simply not big enough, and parts of it are literally falling down.
	When I asked the Minister whether provision was being made to build a new secondary school in Wellingborough, I received a written answer stating that as part of the building schools for the future programme, Northamptonshire schools are due to be refurbished or rebuilt over the next six to 14 years. Six to fourteen years? This work needs to be carried out now.
	In response to a second question that I asked about a new secondary school in Wellingborough, the Minister said that the Wellingborough area of Northamptonshire is prioritised towards the end of the building schools for the future programme. Apart from the obvious paradox that nothing is prioritised if it is at the end of a list, that means that, three times over, year 7 students could start secondary school and go through the whole of their secondary education before the existing Wellingborough schools are refurbished, yet those schools are in desperate need of repair now.
	There is currently no real choice for parents and children in Wellingborough. If children are not granted their first choice of school, they are rarely granted their second choice. The only pupils who seem to have a real choice of school are those with special educational needs. That is most welcome, but although it is important that statemented children should be able to go to the school that parents believe will cater best for the children's needs, it is equally important that the right funding and resources are put into these schools to help facilitate SEN pupils throughout their schooling. I do not believe that that is happening in Wellingborough.
	Schools in Wellingborough are oversubscribed and some have been forced to take on extra pupils over their maximum intakes. At Wollaston school, years 7 and 9 are over the 240 maximum. At the Wrenn school years 7, 8 and 10 have more pupils than the 250 maximum. Last year, Sir Christopher Hatton school was oversubscribed by more than 40 pupils who put it down as their first choice.
	It is clear from what I have said today that Wellingborough needs a new secondary school, and given the huge increase in development over the next 15 years, we need it now. I ask the Minister to be good enough to deal with the following points. First, what are the mechanisms necessary to get a new secondary school built? Secondly, when can we realistically expect a new secondary school in Wellingborough to be opened? Thirdly, in the intervening period, will he undertake to look at providing more funding so that existing schools can expand for the benefit of all the pupils in Wellingborough?
	I believe that the demolition of John Lea school may have been a genuine mistake, but it is essential that the Government, working with the local education authority, take urgent action to correct the situation.

Phil Hope: I congratulate the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Bone) on securing this debate. I am aware of his interest in this issue from the parliamentary questions that he has tabled in the past.
	Changes to school provision in an area are essentially a matter for local decision. The local authority has a statutory responsibility for planning sufficient school places and for proposing to close schools and to open new ones. These duties are further strengthened in the schools White Paper, which the hon. Gentleman mentioned, and I shall say more about that later if time allows.
	The hon. Gentleman asked about the relevant mechanisms, and I will start by talking about the present school organisation arrangements and why they came about. Before this Government took office in 1997, proposals for changes to schools often came to the Secretary of State for a decision. We considered that those matters were best decided locally, however, and a new system was put in place by the School Standards and Framework Act 1998.
	If a local authority decides that there is a need for a new school, it must first consult in the local area. Among those bodies that we advise should be consulted are any schools affected by the proposals, as well as parents and teachers in the area. I am pleased to say that the guidance was revised in September, when local Members of Parliament were added to the list, as were the local district and parish councils in the area in which the schools are situated. Local authorities are responsible for planning for school places in their area. They have a statutory duty to ensure that there are sufficient places and that high quality education is provided in a cost-effective way.
	I understand that Northamptonshire updated its school organisation plan in September this year. The new plan shows that the authority expects the number of secondary pupils in Wellingborough to increase gradually between now and 2008. However, there are at present 425 surplus places in the town. I shall come back to that point in more detail in a moment. In the longer term, a new secondary school might be required, and if Northamptonshire decides that such a school is needed to cater for a growth in the local population, the mechanism requires it to hold a competition in accordance with the provisions of the Education Act 2002. We have introduced competitions because we want to encourage a wide range of educational providers to come forward and promote schools that have a strong ethos. This is all part of our aim to drive up standards and to ensure that every child has the opportunity to go to a good school.
	As the hon. Gentleman has asked, I shall explain what would happen should Northamptonshire decide to hold a competition. First, the authority would publish a notice inviting interested parties to bring forward proposals for the new secondary school. The authority would then publish a summary of all the proposals received and any that it wished to make itself, as the local authority. Anyone would be able to pass comments on any of the proposals, be they objections or expressions of support. The authority would then submit all proposals and comments to the school organisation committee for consideration. The committee would pass the proposals, with its comments, to the Secretary of State for a decision.
	Of course, any promoter may publish proposals for a new foundation or voluntary school at any time, under the existing arrangements, to increase diversity. There does not need to be a general shortage of places. Such proposals are decided by the school organisation committee, or by the schools adjudicator if the committee cannot reach unanimous agreement. The committee may approve proposals only if it is satisfied that any capital necessary to implement the proposals has been secured. I hope that I have described the mechanism in a straightforward manner.
	Under the normal funding arrangements, the Department for Education and Skills is allocating Northamptonshire schools more than £78 million of capital over the next three years. We expect that money to be used for its priority needs, including the provision of statutory school places. It includes an element to cover pupil number increases. However, local authorities can also apply to the targeted capital fund—the TCF—every two years, if they have exceptional growth that they cannot fund from other sources.
	Northamptonshire has been allocated £12 million from the TCF for 2006–07 for a replacement school in another part of the county where it is prioritising need. Northamptonshire did not apply in the TCF round for 2007–08 funding. It will have a further opportunity in due course to apply for 2008–09 funding.
	On the revenue side, Northamptonshire has benefited from an increase in its total funding for education of £1,100 per pupil in real terms since 1997. We will announce in the near future the school funding settlement for 2006–07 and 2007–08, including each local authority's allocations of the new dedicated schools grant for each of those years.
	In the longer term, the building schools for the future programme—a massive investment in schooling—will support investment in all secondary schools in Northamptonshire, including new schools, where there is a need. Northamptonshire is expected to enter the building schools for the future programme in waves seven to nine—2011–14—with projects in Northampton and Corby. It has proposed five geographical groupings of schools for its building schools for the future investment. Wellingborough, as the hon. Gentleman rightly said, is prioritised in the final tranche of investment in waves 13 to 15, in 2017–18.
	I want to set out the detail of the local position that the hon. Gentleman described. I understand that since the closure of the John Lea school more than seven years ago in July 1998, Wellingborough has been served by three secondary schools. The John Lea school was closed because the number of pupils on the roll fell below 50, with more than 90 per cent. surplus places, and funding empty places, as we know, can represent a poor use of resources. The three remaining schools—Sir Christopher Hatton, the Weavers school and Wrenn school—now have 425 spare places between them.
	I am aware—and the hon. Gentleman mentioned—that the Weavers school has been in special measures since November 2004. In conjunction with Ofsted, the authority is addressing that. The new head teacher is helping the process and two additional school governors have been appointed to provide additional support. The local authority is also supporting the school, and there have been discussions with Department for Education and Skills advisers about how that can most effectively be done The Department has partnered Northamptonshire and Lincolnshire for the new relationship with schools. Each school will be allocated a school improvement partner, who are mostly experienced head teachers and senior managers in schools. They will provide high-quality support, challenge and monitoring. Given the hon. Gentleman's concern about the quality of education at that school and its current position, I advise him strongly to get active and join the school and local authority in finding ways in which the school can turn the situation around.
	On the question of growth, which has been raised by the hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members in the Chamber, the authority is confident that recent enlargements to its secondary schools will provide sufficient capacity to meet future demand for places in the medium term. In the longer term, Northamptonshire might decide that a new secondary school will be required to cater for growth in the local population, but that will be a decision for Northamptonshire at a local level. I understand that there are no current plans to open a further secondary school in Wellingborough, but the local authority will monitor that situation and the progress with growth projections, which he mentioned earlier.
	I have described the situation that pertains to date, so I shall briefly mention some of the changes that we propose in the White Paper, which might have some future relevance to the issues raised by the hon. Gentleman. Building on the progress that we have made since 1997, our aim is to transform our school system, so that every child receives an excellent education, whatever their background and wherever they live.
	The White Paper sets out our plans to improve radically the system by putting parents and the needs of their children at the heart of our school system. We will ensure that every school delivers an excellent education, that every child achieves to their potential and that the system as a whole is increasingly driven by parents and by choice.
	We are going to introduce tougher rules for failing schools. Schools in special measures will be more quickly turned around and where no progress is made after a year a competition for new providers will be held. Schools that receive a notice to improve from the Ofsted will enter special measures within a year if progress is not made. Parents will be able to urge Ofsted action, or request new providers. Where there is strong demand or dissatisfaction with existing choices, local authorities will have to respond to their concerns.
	Time does not allow me to go into more detail unfortunately, but there is a new approach, in particular with the abolition of school organisation committees, which gives local authorities a key role in making decisions on the most appropriate schools for an area. The authority will be expected to assess proposals that it receives on their merits and approve the one that best meets the needs of the area. Under the new regime, it will be possible for a local authority's decision to be challenged, in which case the schools adjudicator will make a decision.
	I hope that I have described the mechanisms, outlined some of the factors that will affect a decision in terms of timing—
	The motion having been made after half-past Two o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. Deputy Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
	Adjourned at one minute past Three o'clock.